Search This Blog

Saturday, August 27, 2016

Dear Readers: For this week I thought the following letters were interesting in light of Trump's appeal to parts of the white American working class and underclass. The discussion is also interesting on account of the modern Left's neglect of class after having fully embraced Identity Politics. Both were sent to 'The Age' at the date indicated. Once more, neither were published.

Parts have been slightly extended on account that I no longer have to limit either to 200 words for publication in The Age. Upon submission both were 200 words or less.

Duncan Fine (16/8)
portrays Senator David Leyonhjelm's case against Fairfax on account of the
Racial Discrimination Act as ludicrous.Indeed white men do enjoy certain kinds of privileges which need to be
understood and recognised in context to provide a fair go for women and
minorities. And Leyonhjelm is not being serious apart from trying to 'test the boundaries'. But on the other hand surely
vilification on the basis of gender or race should always be taken seriously. There are contexts, here, where
emotional and social harm can be visited upon those usually considered to be
privileged. Further, where once we heard of the dominance of ‘rich white men’,
these days the element of class is conveniently ignored.Economic stratification and the class system
under capitalism are ‘conveniently relegated to the too hard basket’. In the
United Statesworking class white men
have become increasingly propagandized by the forces of social reaction.And to a significant degree this has occurred
under the watch of a Democratic Party – which until Bernie Sanders’ Presidential
campaign had overwhelmingly failed to address their class interests. Indeed
many seem to have no issue with terms like ‘poor white trash’.Human liberation requires reciprocal human solidarity ;
and this is not exhausted by the categories of race and gender.

In his article (21/8) Paul McGeough laments the cynical
attempts of some to form a kind of ‘white racial consciousness’ ;and the danger that such a project will be
exploited to promote an agenda of racism, or even white supremacism.But does ‘consciousness of whiteness’ have to
take such a form?What if instead we
were talking of a kind of ‘critical consciousness’ that recognised the
injustice of past privileges of ‘whiteness’ ; but which also recognised the double
standards and dehumanization that goes with middle and ruling class putdowns of
‘poor white trash’ and the like?As well
as recognising pre-existing forms of class exploitation and oppression. Where
past privileges are fading, and where white working class and under class
people experience various kinds of disadvantage, contempt, and even
vilification, perhaps it is time to develop new kinds of solidarity –between
working class people entirely regardless of ‘race’.But also recognising the specific injustices
faced by economically disadvantaged ‘white’ communities. Unlike class relations
‘whiteness’ cannot (and of course should not) be ‘abolished’.So for human liberation disadvantaged working
class and under-class ‘white’ communities need to join in solidarity with other
oppressed communities in a common struggle for mutual recognition, respect,
inclusion, and liberation.

ALSO THIS WEEK WE'RE PROMOTING A NEW BOOK BY FABIAN ACTIVIST ADRIAN B L SOH:

above: A photo of the author of

"Making
Science Work for All", Adrian B L Soh

And opposite: a photo of the Front CoverThe following is a brief synopsis of the book:

Australia having a population of just over 23 million people
versus the BRIC countries of Brazil, Russia, India and China, Australia and
countries of a similar population size will struggle to compete against these
economies in the 21st century in terms of wages. However, the implication of
the low wages of these countries will also mean two things that middle-tier
countries will find it hard to argue for increases in taxation, reduce costs in
other areas of the economy or find niche or new industries to compete in. This
is why it is imperative more than ever for middle-tier countries like Australia
to invest in science and technology. Public investment in science is needed,
because it would take pressure off private sector research and development
budgets by conducting basic research in technology before it becomes commercialised
by technology start ups. So the question is how can we balance these competing
objectives of having to keep taxes at a competitive level, investing in much
needed basic research, providing finance to technology start ups, while
maintaining income levels in an increasingly competitive global market. I argue
in my book "Making Science Work for All" that we can do this through
a participatory budgeting scheme for science.

Saturday, August 6, 2016

Above: Hawke's policies of 'Consensus' and 'the Accords' were popular vote winners - But not all of those policies' long term ramifications were positive

What follows are another series of letters - sent by myself (Tristan Ewins) to The Age, The Herald Sun, and QandA over the past few months. Again: none were published.

Dr Tristan Ewins

Is a new ‘Hawke-ian’
Consensus ‘The Way Forward’ in Australia?

“Mark
Kenny (11/7) looks forward to a new, ‘Hawke-style’ consensus – nutted out
between employers, unions, welfare groups. As opposed to the
“partisanship” and “populism” recently on-show. But the Accord Era was in some
ways only made possible by a particular conjuncture of union coverage,
mobilisation and capacity to deliver. In any case, the wage restraint that
was delivered by organised labour was rewarded only with modest social wage
measures. (not with transition to some Swedish model) Employers won-big
under Hawke and Keating. Their support was of assistance in Hawke’s assumption
of power. But as industrial demobilisation took hold, union militancy
became reviled. The hope of union policy influence was steadily
quashed as demobilisation meant unions had not-enough to bargain with.
Today organised labour still declines slowly; and many employers see no
interest in multi-lateral compromises which offer unions a meaningful ‘seat at
the table’. We are left with ‘convergence politics’ based on
neo-liberalism, technocracy, cosmopolitanism and globalism. What we really NEED
is deep pluralism and authenticity in politics. Where democratic conflict
is an accepted feature of liberal/social democracy. Where labour, welfare,
environmental and other movements join together in solidarity with a broad
‘counter-culture’ or 'counter-hegemonic historic bloc'.”

What are our priorities on
gender equality?

Jessica Irvine (‘The Age’, 24/7) argues advancing women’s interests and the
economy involves making men feel “less confident” and to
“sense…their…limitations”.She sees
men’s competitiveness and over-confidence as shutting women out, helping
precipitate disasters like the Global Financial Crisis.Women’s and men’s learned behaviour may be a
factor: so long as we don’t resort to ‘attributing a bad essence’.But perhaps more importantly capitalism
involves instability, waste, crisis, painful ‘corrections’.Is the ascent of women to positions of power
within capitalism an answer to this?Or
is it a problem with the dynamics and resultant priorities of the capitalist
system itself?It is right to elevate
women’s position in the labour market, public life, in sport – with the aim of
‘flux’ around the point of equality. If our principle is equality, though, we
should also be concerned with the decline of men’s participation and
performance in education. Also, for most women, labour market regulation and
social wage enhancement could be more substantial than ‘a woman in the US
Federal Reserve’. That is: “lift up” and respect ‘traditional women’s
vocations’ in nursing, aged care, retail, hospitality, tourism, teaching,
cleaning, child-care.We need solidarity
between women and men to‘lift us all
up’, and not leave anyone behind.

Economic Inequality in Australia

Social research by the ‘McKrindle Group’ (Herald-Sun, early August 2016) observes increasing inequality between
Australians. The top 20% have 12 times the income of the bottom 20%. And the
top 20% have 71 times the wealth of the bottom 20%. There are many causes.The impact of labour market deregulation on
the lower end.Threadbare, punitive
welfare.A weaker labour movement.Prevalence of part-time, insecure work.Retirements are pushed back until 70 ; and for
some the intensity of work increases to increase profits, and expand markets
and purchasing power - which prolongs the viability of capitalism.Outcomes we get from labour markets and the
inheritance of private wealth are not always fair.Some skilled workers (eg: aged care nurses,
child care workers) are exploited because private labour markets cannot sustain
more without government subsidy. Some do unpleasant work, perhaps with unsocial
hours. (eg: cleaners) – But this is not factored in where ‘demand and supply’
for skills rules. This unfairness shows why we need a ‘social wage’,‘social insurance’ and welfare state –
financed through progressive taxes.And
also labour market regulation and labour union rights - to prevent unfair
outcomes.Hence the centrality of the
principle: “from each according to ability, to each according to need”.

Loneliness amongst the Aged ; and Aged
Care Priotiries

James
Bartholomew (‘The Age’, 29/7) identifies the scourge of loneliness amongst the
elderly: and the responsibility of family to ameliorate that.But this is not solely a private
responsibility. Just as charity cannot replace welfare for want of resources,
neither can all families manage alone without assistance.A National Aged Care Insurance Scheme would
surpass ‘user pays’ for Aged Care, improving the quality of care, while
provided from an egalitarian Levy.There
would be ratios for Registered Aged Care Nurses, as well as for other Aged Care
workers. Standards would be upheld not only in areas like food quality, but in
resident health, satisfaction and happiness, and access to communications and
information services and technology.To
tackle isolation, social interaction would be facilitated for a variety of
interests -both for those in care, and
those at home.And combatting the trend
to suicide—which mainly affects men. There would be home visits, and greater
mobility ; with social outings, travel vouchers and associated services.
Finally, pensions must be increased to end deprivation– and financial support
given when dealing with unforeseen emergencies. (eg: a broken washing
machine)Yet all this would require
billions ; so is undoable without tax reform.

From a Discussion in Facebook on
Choice in Disability Services and Aged Care

I'm
potentially well-disposed towards allowing Not-for-Profits to offer services
alongside the public sector. IF they do a good job. (but the public sector must
be a viable choice also) The problem is - a) that ALL the providers need enough
funding to provide the services at a very good level of quality ; and b) that
aged people and their families benefiting from the Scheme need the flexibility
to move between providers without significant disadvantage. That is: if there's
a strong element of user pays that neutralises the very 'choice' schemes like
NDIS are supposed to provide. It means people with limited means have no 'practical
choice' in reality where user-pays mechanisms are onerous..... So what we're
talking about is getting rid of the old user pays mechanisms - which could run
into the tens or even hundreds of thousands. Perhaps there could be a small
co-payment just to encourage people to think carefully about their choices. And
progressively scaled to capacity to pay. But that would have to be utterly negligible
when compared with the existing system. To be acceptable the new system would
have to overwhelmingly rid itself of user-pays mechanisms ; leaving nothing but
a 'functional co-payment' - whose role is not to FUND the system ; but only to
encourage careful choices.

On the issue of Debt in the Economy

Ron Fischer (Herald-Sun
Letters, 3/8) points out that without mechanisms of debt the economy would no
longer function.To elaborate: debt is
often necessary to get a concern started. And certain kinds of investment
(sourced from debt) have a multiplier effect on productivity. Take investment
in certain kinds of software (eg: accounting, word processing) – or investment
in skills-development– with improvements in the pace and quality of production
thus ensuing. ‘Priming the pumps’ in various ways: direct payments to
consumers; government fiscal policy including investment in infrastructure and
services – can also have a stimulatory effect, boosting confidence of investors
and consumers alike.Welfare itself can
contribute as those thus-dependent spend a greater portion of their incomes on necessities.
Austerity on the other hand (cutting spending, services, welfare,
infrastructure investment) can have a deflationary and contractionary
impact.That said: debt cannot expand
forever – though the real problem in Australia is household debt rather than
government debt.The economy needs
structural change so we are able to address household debt without declining
living standards. Industry policy to create high wage jobs with a ‘flow on’ or
‘multiplier’ effect which creates additional work based on the ensuing consumption.And re-establishment of ‘natural public
monopolies’ and other investments in areas like socialised medicine – which
actually improve consumption power through more-efficient service provision.For example the social democratic Nordic
economies contain health costs to about 9 per cent of GDP . While In the US
private sector coverage is 40% - but health costs make up 18% GDP!(Lyons, McAuley, 2015)Australia is ‘in the middle’ here – but can
definitely do better!

Refuting the claim of ‘Mediscare’ :
ie: Why the Liberals really are about privatising Medicare

(to ‘The Age’ and the ‘Herald-Sun’)The message from much of the media
approaching the Federal election was that the erosion of universal healthcare
in Australia did not comprise ‘privatisation’. Privatisation was narrowly
defined as ‘selling an asset off’. Labor’s message was therefore deemed a
‘scare’. Yet upon reflection Labor’s implicit definition of privatisation is
legitimate. Medicare is a relatively modest scheme of socialized medicine by
some international comparisons: providing
for the costs of a variety of consultative services and procedures publicly.Nonetheless, Medicare contains national health costs radically compared with the
overwhelming dependence on private health cover in the United States. The
danger, though, is that we are developing into a ‘two tiered’ health system in
health as in education. With increasing degeneration into Galbraith’s ‘private
affluence, public squalor’. This - accompanied by growing out-of-pocket
expenses - would be both inefficient and unfair: an expression of the principle
of privatisation as opposed to socialisation. But Medicare must be extended as well as defended.
Medicare does not include dental and physiotherapy , or medical aids like
glasses, hearing aids or prostheses. We need a reforming government which
provides for this through the progressive reform and extension of the popular
Medicare Levy without austerity elsewhere.

Hanson’s Pitch: as ‘an Ordinary
Australian’ against ‘Left Elites’

Watching QandA it appears to be a deliberate strategy
from Pauline Hanson to appear inarticulate; 'kind of naive'; an ‘outsider’ amidst so-called ‘elites’.-
There are people who can identify with that ; and when we attack Hanson in some
ways they just identify with her even more. It makes her look like 'the victim'. Pauline
Hanson’s 'comeback' was stirred up in sections of the media ; appearances on
morning television etc. Thankfully, her
party is not strongly organized. It is built around a 'personality' and will
fade again when she leaves the political scene. Also, thankfully her organization
perhaps detracts from the 'United Patriots Front' and similar extreme-right groups...
Perhaps it detracts from a full-on ideologically-committed and violent fascist organization.But the fear and disrespect she sows nonetheless
disrupt the cohesion of our society.The
best place to start for progressives is to acknowledge and address the insecurities
that Hanson and other Right-wing forces take advantage of.Exploitation of foreign workers undercutting
local jobs. Confusion in the wake of the erosion of ‘traditional’ Australian
identity and communities. Pockets of isolation,
insecurity, and exclusion.A failure to
engage with those affected; dismissed casually as ‘bogans’. (perhaps itself a
‘class-based put-down’)

A Question to QandA for Sam Dastyari that was not
Used

Senator Sam
Dastyari ; You are on record identifying $31 Billion yearly in Corporate Tax
Avoidance. But earlier this year Bill Shorten announced policies which would
wind back only $2 billion of this over four years. Why has no political party
moved to wind back a significant proportion of Corporate Tax Avoidance? ALSO:
With US Company Taxes up to 39% - would Labor reverse Company Tax cuts so
business 'pays their fair share' for infrastructure and services they benefit
from?

THE RED FLAG IS STILL FLYING HERE

INTERESTED IN SPONSORING THIS PAGE?

This blog and several other websites are maintained by Tristan Ewins for nothing in return. But I would greatly appreciate any progressive sponsors. This page and others I maintain attract many thousands of visitors every year. Some posts even attract over 1000 readers on their own. So in return for a significant donation your Advertisement or Message could appear here and at my other pages! That is: assuming you support the blog and its message, as well as other sites where your message could appear. Contact me at the following email if you are interested:tristane@bigpond.net.au

Total Pageviews

About Me

Tristan's areas of expertise include Australian and world politics, social theory, education, history, and computer gaming for PC. He considers himself a liberal, and also a socialist, but has also referred to himself as a left social democrat. He says such - conscious that there was once a time when 'social democracy' and 'socialism' were synonymous. Furthermore, Tristan is a long-time member of the Australian Labor Party - specifically its Socialist Left wing. He is also involved in the Australian Fabian Society. Tristan has written for many publications - including a stint freelancing for 'The Canberra Times': the daily broadsheet of the Australian Capital. Tristan's Personal Homepage is here: http://sites.google.com/site/tristanewinsfreelancewriter